SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Since at least 2010, Hawking has spoken publicly about his fears that an advanced alien civilization would have no problem wiping out the human race the way a human might wipe out a colony of ants. At the media event announcing the new project, he noted that human beings have a terrible history of mistreating, and even massacring, other human cultures that are less technologically advanced — why would an alien civilization be any different?
And yet, it seems Hawking's desire to know if there is intelligent life elsewhere in the universe trumps his fears. Today (July 20), he was part of a public announcement for a new initiative called Breakthrough Listen, which organizers said will be the most powerful search ever initiated for signs of intelligent life elsewhere in the universe.
...
Jill Tarter, former director of the Center for SETI (Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence) also has expressed opinions about alien civilizations that are in stark contrast to Hawking's."While Sir Stephen Hawking warned that alien life might try to conquer or colonize Earth, I respectfully disagree," Tarter said in a statement in 2012. "If aliens were to come here, it would be simply to explore. Considering the age of the universe, we probably wouldn't be their first extraterrestrial encounter, either.
"If aliens were able to visit Earth, that would mean they would have technological capabilities sophisticated enough not to need slaves, food or other planets," she added.
So, who's right, Jill Tarter, or Stephen Hawking? Will advanced aliens have no need of human popplers, or will survivors of the Centauran Human Harvest & BBQ of 2057 call this moment, "Pulling a Hawking?"
See also our earlier stories: Stephen Hawking and Yuri Milner Announce $100 Million "Breakthrough Listen" SETI Project and More Warnings of an AI Doomsday — This Time From Stephen Hawking.
Original Submission
(Score: 2) by arslan on Friday July 24 2015, @04:01AM
She might be right about the need part... but as humanity have shown many times in history, you don't necessarily kill for need.. there are countless other reason, including a lack of one and an alien's psychology might be sufficiently different from us that they have even more different reasons.
Also, she's may also be right on the explore bit.... but then again, what an alien considers explore might be disagreeable to a normal human's bodily functions..
I personally think Hawking just made a reasonably well calculated logical decision. Humanity is not yet ready for first contact at this point in time. We can't even stop killing ourselves... and we're still stuck on the same piece of rock (all our eggs in the same basket...). When we've dispersed ourselves out into the galaxy, then it would be a better bet. At least some can run and the species can survive if shit hits the fan.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Friday July 24 2015, @04:44AM
FTFY. Because, when used to denote a wilful choice, "reason" sorta imply "as determined by reason/rational thinking".
As so, the waste of time/energy for the sole purpose to destroy an ant colony zillions miles from your home doesn't pertain to reason/rational no matter how alien is your psychology. It's about the efficiency of your expenditure and I cannot think a civilisation can get to space travel if is so irrational to spend heaps of energy just because.
Granted, you won't stop digging the ground for the foundation of your weekend home just because an ant colony is there, but the destruction is just collateral to your reason to be there.
--
* where's my <strike> markup? If my mind doesn't play tricks on me, it used to exist/be accepted, doesn't it?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by maxwell demon on Friday July 24 2015, @04:51AM
Indeed, strike seems to be gone. I'm also pretty sure that it was available.
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Friday July 24 2015, @04:54AM
I hope faster-that-light travel is possible.
It seems that <strike> was removed after the striketastrophe. Even though it was solved without removal. That's weird. It must have been exploited by others.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 3, Funny) by lentilla on Friday July 24 2015, @06:31AM
you won't stop digging the ground for the foundation of your weekend home just because an ant colony is there, but the destruction is just collateral to your reason to be there
One intergalactic bypass here we come! (With apologies to The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy.)
(Score: 2) by captain normal on Friday July 24 2015, @04:54AM
She's assuming (as is Hawking) that alien life has evolved on a like planet in an environment similar to Earth. That will may be, as nothing is impossible in an infinite universe, but it is actually more likely that some type (or many types) of life has evolved in an entirely different environment and is totally different from our concept of "life". We'll have no way of knowing until we and/or they recognize the other. It may well be that they or we will see the other as meat. Humans seem to react like that...that may be why we have not had contact with species that may have seen us. In any event, at this time our best bet at colonizing the universe may be to send out viruses containing our DNA on millions of New Horizons type missions. In the hope that millions of years in the future, a species somewhat similar to us may reach and evolve on some planet. Oh...wait...maybe that happened to us?
When life isn't going right, go left.
(Score: 1) by anubi on Friday July 24 2015, @05:13AM
Speculation if rife that "they" evolved on a similar planet as ours.
They may not be interested in us as much as they are interested in our planet...
A planet already compatible with their needs.
I doubt they want to mess with ownership litigation.
"Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]
(Score: 2) by takyon on Friday July 24 2015, @05:38AM
I find it hard to believe that aliens will achieve interstellar travel before sustainable living (widespread solar and fusion, vertical farming, arcologies, dyson spheres, etc.). Even the most difficult asteroid mining schemes will be easier than taking over the nearest blue planet, and there's a lot of water in some of those asteroids.
We should really think about crashing moons and planets into Mars to increase its gravity.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 1) by anubi on Tuesday July 28 2015, @12:53AM
That is what I was afraid "they" ( the aliens ) would do to US!
"Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]
(Score: 2) by takyon on Friday July 24 2015, @05:17AM
The only complex life we know of requires water, carbon, oxygen, DNA, phospholipid bilayers, etc. If there are other seriously different types of environments capable of supporting life, they will exist alongside millions or billions of planets similar to Earth, especially if the dynamics of solar system formation tend to put rocky, water-rich planets with magnetospheres and higher gravity than Mars in the habitable zone (or habitable moons around gas giants). Mars is a great clue for us because it is so close to being able to support life. We practically have two habitable bodies in our 1 solar system, not counting the potential of liquid oceans under icy surfaces.
Beyond composition, all life in the universe will likely be fighting and evolving to survive, meaning that intelligent organisms will likely have an aggressive side due to natural selection. But these organisms will have to cooperate, communicate, and become less violent before they can develop space travel. And by the time they can travel from star to star, they won't have need of human slaves/meat/bitcoins/etc.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by captain normal on Friday July 24 2015, @05:32AM
Sounds a lot like Klingons... a fictional species that were based on Human traits. :-)
When life isn't going right, go left.
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Friday July 24 2015, @12:56PM
The only way Klingons make any sense at all is to presume that they never invented interstellar travel themselves, but instead somehow stole it from another species.
(Score: 1) by similar_name on Friday July 24 2015, @06:24PM
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 24 2015, @08:09PM
rockets were developed during war
The first liquid-fueled rockets were developed during peacetime [wikipedia.org] by a guy working without Department of War funding.
Had you used the word "improved" or "further" or "weaponized", you would have been accurate.
along with nuclear fission
That chronology is accurate [wikipedia.org]
...but again, only if you change the wording to include "controlled" or "weaponized" and you realize that you can't "develop" a process that already exists in nature.
-- gewg_
(Score: 1) by similar_name on Friday July 24 2015, @11:38PM
(Score: 2) by takyon on Friday July 24 2015, @05:06AM
Jill Tarter is still right: spacefaring civilizations probably won't commit xenocide. There's no data for that specific claim, but the events that lead up to space travel require some degree of cooperation and empathy.
Hawking and others have warned against active SETI: beaming signals at the aliens. Unless alien civilizations exist within 5-100 light years, I don't see this as a credible threat at all (and Jill's point still stands). When we get next-next-generation space observatories online, I hope we check out the nearest star systems on the off chance that they are supporting life.
If faster-than-light travel ever proves feasible, then this debate will need to be revisited... since it could mean that aliens are visiting Earth easily and whenever they want.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]